Cost to zero? Definitely not.

Solar in space produces 30% more power, and doesn't turn off at night, meaning you don't need batteries. That means power costs, say, 25% of what it currently does measured against terrestrial solar and batteries.

The 75% electricity discount needs to pay for launch vehicles, specially designed satellites, and the inability to service the hardware or resell it when it's EOL for the data center.

It's a gamble. Maybe it'll turn out to be a slight edge, maybe it'll turn out to fail, but it's not a sure thing and it certainly isn't going to hugely decrease the cost.

Especially since they're competing against Google and their custom designed hardware that's far more power efficient for AI. It's not clear that NVIDIA running at a 75% dollar discount beats Google's best TPU in compute per dollar.

How will we handle cooling in space?

You are going to be utterly shocked when you realize that solar panels work on the ground, too. You can buy so many batteries, and so many geographically separated locations for your panels, for the price of launching a datacenter into space.

Lame. I was expecting Elmo to crack cold fusion in a ketamine-infused weekend and solve power constraints for the world.

Guess he is not as bright as he thinks he is.

For the price of launching a datacenter into space, you could probably build one in NA, one in Europe, and one in Asia and solve the "sun sets" problem that way with the side benefit of having excess capacity you can turn on by paying for local non-solar electricity.